And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades).
Controversial proposals like Chat control are often pushed by hard lobby through the current eu presidency state because of their possition. It is likely that if Denmark wasn't heading eu at the time they would have little to do with Chat control. Also likely they were one of the more resilient countries to propose this.
Some people still don't have a clue that it is the almost the entirety of EU member countries in Europe that are rotten and are not doing particularly well.
The only country in Europe that is the exception is Norway which is not part of the EU.
With OP postulating that it is to enable corruption, and a sub-reply affirming that it is therefore the trait of a country in decay, bringing in Serbia as a counter-example is hilarious.
Serbia ranks 116th in the corruption perception index, Germany 10th. (Lower is better)
Corruption perception lags actual corruption. Countries that are becoming more corrupt are perceived as less corrupt. Countries that are becoming less corrupt are perceived as more corrupt.
>And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades)
Yeah, a lot of the western countries that aren't wealthy enough to afford the luxury of indulging in absurd farcical politics and policies over the past 40yr are doing pretty decent.
The Swiss?
Norway?
And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades).